my negs are too contrasty - what to do?

Jobo's might be continuous, but they are not violent. And there is a perhaps subtle but definitely important difference between strong and violent agitation. It is possible to agitate too little (unevent development, insufficient breakup of flow from being too regular), but it isn't really possible to agitate too much. But it is possible to agitate too violently (surge marks).

As others have said, DON'T change your agitation method UNTIL you have changed your dev time and proven that inadequate. If you can stick to your agitation scheme and find that changing the dev time is sufficient, then there you go. But perhaps you come down to 3.5 minutes, which is too short. Well, then maybe you can decrease your agitation. BUT - even then it's more advisable to dilute more rather than agitate less.

For reference only, I do 5 inversions in 10s. 10s of agitation per minute.

allan
 
I see a prefectly good negative of a a high contrast situation.
Having shade in the bridge and bright cloudy sky is not the best way to say my negatives are too contrasty, maybe your escene was too contrasty to start with.
Also remember that scanners don;t handle highlights very well.

To check if you have overdeveloped try the following:
- Put your nrgative on top of a book
- See if you can read through the densest part
- If you can not cut your time by 15% next time.

F76+ is an excellent developer, keep using it, until you get the kinks out of it. No need to move to an older type developer
The time you mentioned 9min at 75F was with 1+19 rrrigghtt?
It sounds about right for that high dilution but as a caveat, recommended times are starting points, you always have to adjust for yourself.

Also if you go from 1+9 to 1+19 add an 80% of time to get the new time so to convert 3.5 min*1.8 = 6.5 minutes at 1+19

I have not had problems of blowing highlights with F76+ yet, but have not used it in FOMA filmas either.




shutterflower said:
Actually, that negative has the full range. . . .is it hte film that can't handle its own highlights?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
A few more comments:

The first example you linked to, exposure could also be playing a role. Do you expose a little too much with your negative films? Hard to tell without seeing the negs themselves.

I would always use a stop bath. First it kills development instantly - yes, I know the instructions say 30 seconds, but a friend of mine researched this and found stop kills development in a faction of a second. The 30 seconds is because it is easier to fit into a development run. But the stop will stop the development cleanly.

Second reason for a stop bath is some fixers work better if used. This becomes even more critical with some color processes. I would get in the habit of using it.
 
kaiyen said:
Jobo's might be continuous, but they are not violent. And there is a perhaps subtle but definitely important difference between strong and violent agitation. It is possible to agitate too little (unevent development, insufficient breakup of flow from being too regular), but it isn't really possible to agitate too much. But it is possible to agitate too violently (surge marks).

As others have said, DON'T change your agitation method UNTIL you have changed your dev time and proven that inadequate. If you can stick to your agitation scheme and find that changing the dev time is sufficient, then there you go. But perhaps you come down to 3.5 minutes, which is too short. Well, then maybe you can decrease your agitation. BUT - even then it's more advisable to dilute more rather than agitate less.

For reference only, I do 5 inversions in 10s. 10s of agitation per minute.

allan
Click to expand...

By the way - you raise a good point, and it might be good to explain it further for those who are new to B&W developing - the issue of the developing time being 'too short'.

As most of us know, for most developers, you can adjust several factors to affect the level of development of your film:

1) Temperature
2) Developer strength
3) Agitation method and duration
4) Time in developer

Within a given range, temperatures that are warmer will cause faster development than temperatures that are cooler. Not true of all developers - some are 'panthermic' or 'all temperature'. But not many are, and they are usually labeled as 'panthermic' if they are.

Developer strength can generally be adjusted by the dilution with water one gives the developer working solution by mixing. Common dilutions are 1+1, 1+19, 1+50, but there are others. One thing to consider is that different developers take on different properties when dilution is increased - more grain and more accutance, for example. One must read the directions for that particular developer.

Agitation is usually a personal decision. Some is usually needed, but many differ on how much is enough and how much is too much. Suffice to say that more agitation will tend to increase development and too little will cause uneven development as developer is exhausted and stops working in one area, while micro-currents bring fresh developer to another, etc. Usually best to find some method that works for you and ALWAYS DO THAT, whatever THAT is.

Time in developer is the really interesting part. You see, it is best to avoid soaking your negs for a really long time. Although many have reported soaking negs overnight (yikes!) with no ill effects, the emulsion is made of gelatin (jello, essentially, ground up boiled horses hooves and etc) and it is instantly soluble in water. The longer in the developer, the more chance of physical damage.

However, one must also avoid developer time that is 'too short' as Kaiyen mentioned. What is 'too short' and why?

This is due to the mystery of proportions.

Imagine a rectangle with a diagonal line going from the lower left corner to the upper right corner. This line represents percentage of development - from 0% at lower left to 100% at upper right. The X axis (along the base of rectangle) represents time. The Y axis (up and down along the sides) represents percentage of development. As you can imagine (I hope), the less time you have, the steeper the line, so more actual development happens 'per minute' of time passed.

And film doesn't actually develop in a straight line - it offers more 'food' for the developer to much on at first, and later the developer has to hunt for crumbs. So the line is more of a upsweeping curve than a straight line. The last minute is less important that the first minute - but if there are fewer minutes, you interrupt more development by stopping development early or going too long.

Since, most of the film developing happens first, with less and less happening as each minute passes. Eventually, it would reach a point where there was no more silver halide to be converted and development would cease, but for most developers, this is to be avoided - your negs would be seriously overdeveloped, giving 'lith' effects or even totally black!

So if you make a small timing error in a ten minute development time, it means a tiny bit of remaining development gets interrupted. If you make a small timing error in a five minute developing time, a much larger percentage of the development has been stopped before it can happen.

It is therefore much harder to control precise development of B&W film with times that are less than five minutes - this is usually considered the absolute minimum. Ten minutes is much easier to work with, and longer times even less likely to mess up due to miscalculation of developing time.

However, you can't just 'decide' to increase your dev times. You must compensate with something else or you will over develop your negs. Lower film temperature, lower concentration of developer to water, something like that.

There are compensation charts that will get you in the general area, or you can use resources like the Massive dev chart to find out what has worked for others before with your film/developer combo. You may notice that most dev times listed are more than 5 minutes. Some few venture into 3 minute territory, but frankly, I find that impossible for me to control properly.

So that's what it means when people say to avoid dev times that are too short.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bmattock said:
Time in developer is the really interesting part. You see, it is best to avoid soaking your negs for a really long time. Although many have reported soaking negs overnight (yikes!) with no ill effects, the emulsion is made of gelatin (jello, essentially, ground up boiled horses hooves and etc) and it is instantly soluble in water. The longer in the developer, the more chance of physical damage.Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
Click to expand...
A story about William Mortensen (the Anti-Ansel) mentioned that he was known to stand develop film for several days by placing his film in the developer and then putting it in a refrigerator. He would take the film out every day or so, take it to the darkroom and do an inspection. If the film was not devloped enough back in to the refrigerator it would go. What ever floats your boat, as long as you get the results you want and are consistant about it.

Two or three rolls are not enough, I have now gone through about 10 rolls of FP4 in F76 and I am only now getting the hang of it for my water and handling habits.

As said above, stick with it, keep tesitng and you will get what you want.
BTW: From what my monitor shows me, the second photo, the 1:19 looks pretty good, I don't think it is too contrasty.
 
kmack said:
A story about William Mortensen (the Anti-Ansel) mentioned that he was known to stand develop film for several days by placing his film in the developer and then putting it in a refrigerator. He would take the film out every day or so, take it to the darkroom and do an inspection. If the film was not devloped enough back in to the refrigerator it would go. What ever floats your boat, as long as you get the results you want and are consistant about it.
Click to expand...

William Mortenson was an interesting character who does not get the respect he is due these days. It was sad that Ansel and the f/64 bunch didn't care for him and badmouthed him all the time (as I understand it). I notice his books still sell for more than a couple bucks on eBoy.

Regarding the negs - I don't think I would ever do it the way he seems to have, but one thing to note - for those who don't know, kmack is talking about 'development by inspection'. This is not as easy as it may sound. The negs must be treated in a desensitizing agent, which desensitizes them to a certain frequency of light (I believe it is green, dunno). You can then hold the negs up out of the developer in a darkroom with this special 'safelight' turned on and stop development precisely at the point you prefer. Not done a whole lot anymore, I'd say, but still possible. I'm not even sure where you get the desensitizing agent, or what it is called.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Bill,
Great post (#30). This thread is now up on my Photo-related info blog because of it.

allan
 
kaiyen said:
and f76 isn't just d76 with some special "pixie dust" - it's a phenidone-based developer that isn't really d76 at all. it's basically ddx.
allan
Click to expand...

I stand corrected - Maybe I'm thinking of Crone -76 additive? In any event, the identity of the developing agent is probably less important than the time and temp in this particular case. I think a little empirical testing is called for.

BTW - I've got nothing against phenidone. I've been using a Gainer Vitamin C developer for the last two years made with Phenidone/Lye/Vit C. Let's hear it for Phenidone!
 
Benjamin,
Which gainer dev are you using? I am thinking going that route...after I finish off the scads of other developers I have.

It is kind of interesting that Clayton _doesn't_ offer a D76 equivalent. F60 is kinda close, I think, but I forget exactly what's in it. And the CP developer is a PQ variant on the metol-based fine grain ones (Microdol/perceptol).

allan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom